HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1987/06/24 AGENDA
City Planning Commission
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, June 24, 1987 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Meeting of May 13, 1987
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission
on any subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an
item on today's agenda. Each speaker's presentation may not exceed 5
minutes.
1. Consideration of Final EIR-87-20tay Rio Business Park
2. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) GPA-87-1: Consideration of a General Plan Amendment
from Low Density Residential, Agriculture and Reserve and
Open Space to Medium Density Residential and Research and
Limited Industrial located west of Otay Valley Road and
north of the City of San Diego boundary in the southeast
corner of the Chula Vista City limits - Otay Rio Business
Park
(b) PCZ-87-H: Consideration to rezone 210 acres located
west of Otay Valley Road and north of the City of San
Diego boundary in the southeast corner of the Chula Vista
City limits from A-8 and F-1 to R-1 and I-L-P - Otay
Rio Business Park
(c) PCS-87-6: Consideration of a tentative subdivision
map for Otay Rio Business Park, Chula Vista Tract 87-6,
located west of Otay Valley Road and north of the City
of San Diego boundary in the southeast corner of the
Chula Vista City limits - Otay Rio Business Park
3. Consideration of Final EIR-87-4 Plaza Bonita Apartments
AGENDA -2- June 24, 1987
4. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) GPA-87-3: Consideration of a General Plan Amendment
from Medium Density Residential to High Density Residential
for 4.6 acres adjoining and to the west of the intersection
of 'E' Street and Bonita Road - Stafford Gardner Development
(b) PCZ-87-K: Consideration to rezone 4.6 acres adjoining
and to the west of the intersection of 'E' Street and Bonita
Road from R-1 to R-3 Stafford Gardner Development
5. PUBLIC HEARING: (a) GPA-87-2: Consideration of a General Plan Amendment
from Commercial Thoroughfare to High Density Residential
for 2.6 acres located at the southeast corner of Flower
Street and Jefferson Avenue - Appel Development Company
(b) PCZ-87-L: Consideration to rezone 2.6 acres located
at the southeast corner of Flower Street and Jefferson
Avenue from C-T to R-3 Appel Development Company
6. OTHER BUSINESS: Resolution of the City of Chula Vista Planning Commission
adopting a statement of concern with respect to develop-
ment of Otay Mesa (Continued)
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSION COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT AT to the Regular Business Meeting of July 8, 1987 at
7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers
June 19, 1987
TO: City Planning Commission
FROM: George Krempl, Director of Planning
SUBJECT: Staff Report on Agenda Items for Planning Commission Meeting of
June 24, 1987
1. Consideration of Final EIR 87-2 - Otay Rio Business Park
A. BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission, on June lO, 1987, conducted a public hearing for
the draft environmental impact report for Otay Rio Business Park, a 211
acre proposed industrial and residential development located on the west
side of Otay Valley Road south of the Otay River. At the close of the
public review period, comments had been received from seven state and
local agencies, as well as the observations made by the Commission during
the public hearing.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Certify that the final EIR has been prepared in compliance with CEQA,
the State CEQA guidelines and the environmental review procedures of
the City of Chula Vista; and furthermore, that the Planning
Commission will consider the EIR as they reach a decision on the
proposed project.
C. DISCUSSION
Within the final EIR, comments received and responses are included in the
beginning of the report. Any changes made to the text in response to the
comments are highlighted in an italic print. Where text has been
eliminated, lines are drawn through the narrative to indicate exactly
which language was deleted.
The agencies which commented on the draft report which are summarized here
include: the California Department of Water Resources, the City of San
Diego, the CalTrans Division of Aeronautics, the California Department of
Fish and Game, the California Department of Conservation Division of Mines
and Geology, and CalTrans.
Department of Water Resources
Comments received from Mr. Charles R. White, Chief of the Planning Branch,
Southern District, of the State Department of Water Resources, recommended
that the City implement a comprehensive program to use reclaimed water for
irrigation purposes. A list of required and recommended water
conservation measures were included with the recommendations.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page ~
These are general recommendations submitted as a standard procedure for
all proposed developments which involve provision of landscaping. The
Planning Department considers such a program upon examination of the
amount and type of landscaping and irrigation contained in the Precise
Plan, and would determine at that time whether a program of this type
would be warranted for this development.
City of San Diego
A detailed series of comments were submitted from Mr. David A. Potter,
Deputy Director of the City of San Diego Planning Department. Most of the
comments received requested clarification or changes to the text, much of
it based upon new information provided concerning the proposed Robinhood
Ridge residential development (adjacent to the Otay Rio project site,
within San Diego's jurisdiction), proposed changes to the Brown Field
Master Plan, and the prospect of revisions to the Otay Mesa Community Plan.
Of particular note are comments related to the Transportation/Access
portion of the draft EIR, which state that since the proposed project
would generate 9,000 ADT more than proposed traffic generation from
General Plan land uses east of 1-805, volumes on Otay Valley would reach
approximately 56,000 ADT at buildout. This would exceed the City of San
Diego's recommended maximum desirable ADT of 40,000 ADT for a six lane
major street.
As a response, it was noted that based on the directional distribution of
trips in the traffic study the proposed project would place approximately
9,000 more daily vehicular trips on Otay Valley Road east of 1-805,
compared to current General Plan land uses. However, the directional
distribution of trips in the traffic study is based on the assumption of
the present land use patterns and street system. As land uses and street
systems in Otay Mesa develop, trips would be expected to be oriented less
toward 1-805 and more toward the east via Otay Valley Road and Heritage
Road. Therefore, the 9,000 daily trips cannot be added directly to the
long-term SANDAG Alternative #5 projections referenced in the letter to
arrive at the total of 56,000 vehicles per day {VPD).
Division of Aeronautics
Comments submitted by Mr. Jack D. Kemmerly, Chief of the Division of
Aeronautics, concurs with the draft reports analysis of airport related
noise and its effect upon the residential portion of the proposed project,
but states that the mitigation measures do not adequately address the
noise impacts. Suggested mitigation measures include notifying all
prospective homeowners and tenants of the close proximity of Brown Field
and its overflights, and requiring noise and avigation easements.
The text of the Final EIR was expanded to include notification of
prospective homeowners of the Brown Field proximity. Also, once revisions
to the Brown Field Master Plan have been approved, noise and aviation
easements could be required. It should be noted, however, that the
recommended conditions of approval for the tentative map require deletion
of the residential portion of the mapat this time.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 3
Department of Fish and Game
Comments submitted from Mr. Peter Bartadelt of the State Department of
Fish and Game expressed primary concern with the elimination of .92 acres
of wetlands habitat currently existing on-site as a part of the Otay River
wetlands habitat system. Although approximately 4 acres of habitat would
be preserved, the Department of Fish and Game views the elimination of the
remaining .92 acres as unacceptable; the habitat should be retained as
natural open space. In addition to this, the 20-25 foot buffer required
surrounding the wetland habitat was also viewed as inadequate, and
suggested expansion of the buffer to 100 feet. Finally, if the Least
Bells Vireo were found to be present on-site, then additional buffers
would be required by the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife.
By way of response, staff has reviewed the issue of encroachment into a
portion of the riparian habitat, consulting with the biologist who
performed the analysis, and with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers who have
issued a nationwide permit for the project with the elimination of the .92
acres of habitat.
Staff disagrees with the Department of Fish and Game's viewpoint that all
of the habitat must be retained since the overall quality of the wetlands
in this area is not high and does not merit retention of all the habitat
present. However, since the recommended conditions of approval for the
tentative subdivision map require retention of lot 2 as an active use
park, the balance of the riparian habitat could be retained and a 100 foot
buffer incorporated into the surrounds of the habitat area. To fulfill
these requirements, proposed 2:1 slopes separating lots 1 and 2 will be
eliminated and replaced with a more gradual incline into the floodplain.
This proposed mitigation has been incorporated into the recommended
conditions of approval for the tentative subdivision map.
With respect to the Least Bells Vireo, the extensive biological surveys
recently conducted by the City in the Otay Rio floodplain and associated
wetland habitat did not find the Least Bells Vireo present on this project
site.
Division of Mines and Geology
Comments submitted by Mr. Dennis J. O'Bryant, Environmental Program
Coordinator for the Department of Conservation, state that they disagree
with the conclusions of the draft EIR that no significant or adverse
impacts would occur from construction of incompatible uses in the MRZ-2
classification. Based upon the proximity of operating aggregate deposits
upstream and downstream from the project site, and the ability to process
gravel at depth to meet specific engineering requirements, the Department
continues to maintain the relevance of including this area in the MRZ-2
classification.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 4
In response to these concerns, recent studies (March, 1987) were performed
for the sole purpose of determining the suitability of site soils as an
aqgregate resource. These studies are described on page 12 of the DEIR.
This site specific study found that the soils on the project site did not
meet criteria for fine aggregate; and therefore, were unsuitable for
mining and extraction.
CALTRANS
Comments submitted by Mr. James Cheshire, Chief of the Environmental
Planning Branch of District ll, recommends the establishment of a
Transportation System Management (TSM) system for air quality impacts
mitigation and requests that funding sources of a TSM strategy be
identified.
In response, it should be noted that the City does not have a TSM program
at this time, and it is beyond the scope of the developers responsibility
to develop such a program.
Finally, at the close of the public hearing on the DEIR on June lO, the
Commission requested additional information from staff regarding the
timing of proposed improvements to Otay Valley Road and the Bridge
crossing the Otay River.
Proposed widening of the bridge crossing and improvements south of the
bridge to Otay Valley Road/Heritage Road are addressed as part of a
facilities benefits assessment district formed by the City of San Diego,
for which the developer for Otay Rio Business Park is a participant. The
timetable for implementing widening and improvements estimates the
completion of the design by 1998, with completion of actual construction
estimated for the year 2001.
The Engineering Department for the City of Chula Vista is currently
preparing an RFP for preparation of the design and final alignment of Otay
Valley Road from 1-805 to the City boundary; that study should be
completed by December, 1987. Beyond that, no timetable has been
established for completion of the construction of those improvements.
WPC 4003P
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 1
2.a. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-87-1 - Consideration of an amendment to the Land
Use Element of the General Plan designatin~
approximately 150 acres, located on the westerly side
of Otay Valley Road and south of the Otay River, fro..
"Low Density Residential" to "Research & Limited
Industrial"
Name of Project (Short Form): Otay Rio Business Park
A. BACKGROUND
The 150 acres of land is part of a 225 acre area recently annexed to the
City of Chula Vista from the City of San Diego in September 1986. In
February 1986, in anticipation of the annexation, the Chula Vista General
Plan Land Use Element was amended by designating land uses for the area
south of the Otay River between 1-805 and the north-south course of Otay
Valley Road (Heritage Road). The land uses included "Low & Medium Density
Residential" and "Parks & Public Open Space" in approximately the same
configuration as the land uses designated on the City of San Diego's "Otay
Mesa Community Plan." (Please see Exhibit "A".)
The applicant, the Otay Rio Business Park, requests an amendment to the
General Plan which would change the land use designation of the westerly
150 acres of "Low Density Residential" (1 to 3 DU's/acre) adjacent to the
north-south segment of Otay Valley Road to "Research & Limited
Industrial". This territory is situated between the toe of the north
facing slopes of the Otay Valley and the lO0 year floodplain line of the
Otay River. (Please see Exhibit ) An accompanying rezoning request,
PCZ-87-11, is a following agenda item. The Environmental Impact Report on
the proposed projects is the preceding agenda item. The approval of the
proposed General Plan Amendment is prerequisite to the substantive
consideration of the said rezoning request.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Certify that the Environmental Impact Report, EIR-87-2, for the
proposed project, has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the
State CEQA Guidelines.
2. Adopt a motion indicating that the contents of the EIR on the
proposed project were considered before the Commission reached a
decision on the proposed project.
3. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the
amendment, GPA-87-1, designating the subject territory "Research &
Limited Industrial."
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 2
C. DISCUSSION
1. Existing Site Characteristics
The subject territory is partially within the floodway and floodplain
of the Otay River. The land has been used for agricultural purposes,
and there are currently two single family dwellings on the property,
which are proposed for removal upon development of site.
2. Adjacent General Plan Designations
As indicated earlier, the subject 150 acres is designated "Low
Density Residential" (1 to 3 dwelling units per acre). The adjacent
designations are as follows:
North: "Parks & Public Open Space (Otay River)"
South: "Parks & Public Open Space and Medium Density
Residential" (4-12 dwellings per acre)
East: City of San Diego's Otay Mesa Community Plan
"Agriculture, Very Low Residential" (0-5 dwellings per
ac~e) and Open Space
West: "Low Density Residential" {1-3 dwellings per acre) and
"Parks & Public Open Space"
3. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use
The subject territory is zoned A-8 (Agricultural, 8 acres minimum)
which is regarded as a holding zone. The zoning and land use
classification of adjacent lands are embodied in the following table.
North F-1 Vacant
South A-8 Vacant {Slopes)
East A-l-lO {S.D.) Vacant
West A-l-lO (S.D.) Vacant
D. ANALYSIS
1. The proposed redesignation would increase the Chula Vista Planning
Area's potential industrial territory by about 150 acres, and would
foster the expansion of the industrial complex which is currently
developing within the successful Otay Valley Road Project Area.
2. The redesignation would also improve Chula Vista's competitive
position with respect to industrial development within the South Bay
Subregion. This improvement could provide in-town employment
opportunities for the rapidly-growing population of Chula Vista, and
materially increase this municipality's tax revenues.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 3
3. While the eventual industrialization of the lands in question will
require the substantial improvement and widening of Otay Valley and
Heritage Roads, the residential development of these lands could
necessitate similar improvement and widening.
4. As a general rule, an acre of industrial development generates 100 to
150 daily traffic movements. The 150 acres in question, therefore,
would probably produce about 20,000 traffic movements per diem,
subsequent to their industrialization. The off-site road
improvements associated with this industrialization could be
methodically provided through the employment of a development
agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the developer.
5. The proposed "Research & Limited Industrial" designation calls for
the development of light and limited types of industrial land use.
The adroit application of development controls, urban-design
guidelines, buffering, and performance standards could assure the
compatibility of these authorized industrial land uses with the
proposed residential development of the City of San Diego's adjacent
and adjoining territories. This application could also protect the
City of Chula Vista's interest in the establishment of a regional
open space preserve along the Otay River.
E. CONCLUSION
The proposed General Plan amendment could improve the economic, fiscal,
and employment conditions of Chula Vista, without compromising the quality
of its environment, or the order and amenity of its urban pattern.
WPC 3714P
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATE~NT
, . OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
APPLICANT S STATEMENT _ _ T RT OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
~r~ uT/! REOUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON _HE PA ,
~¥SS~'~ AN'~ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. --~
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the. names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
_Otay Rio Business Park, a Joint VQ~ture
Otay Rio Business Park I~ a Joint Venture
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
The Chillinqw~rth Corooration OcKa Investments, Ltd. -
Amalqamated Citrus Growers~ Inc.
Liebau Investments~ Ltd.
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
ThQ Chillinoworth Corooration - S'. C] Chillingwnrth .....
Amaloamat~d Citr~t Grnw~r~. lnn.' B- J. HnlmP~
Liebau Investments, Ltd. - F. J. Liebau.
DcKa Investments, Ltd. - B. J. Holmes
3. If any person identified pursuant to {1) above is a non-profit organization or
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization Or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the' past twelve months?
Yes No X If yes, please indicate person(s)
erson is ~etlnea as.. ~n~ ? ......... ~4^. ~state- trust, receiver, syn~,~=,
I~ club, fraternal o~ganiz~!on,.uu~v~'~t~ municipality, district or other
i and an other county, Cl~y eno cou ~,
th ? Y ivision or any other group or combination a~ting as a unit."
cal subd ,
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.) OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK
.- By: THE CHILLINGWORTH CORPORATION 8/Dec./~8~
Slgme~-e-~appltcant/date
WPC 0701P Prlnt or type name of applical~tJ
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 1
2.b. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ 87-H - Consideration to rezone 210 acres on the
west side of Otay Valley Road south of the Otay Rive~'
from A-8 Agricultural and F-1 Floodway zone to I-L-P
L~mited Industrial, R-I Residential, A-~ Agricultural
and F-1 Floodway - Otay Rio Business Park
A. BACKGROUND
The applicant has submitted a request for a general plan amendment,
rezone, tentative subdivision map and precise plan in order to develop a
210 acre site for limited industrial uses, with single family residences
along the southern boundary and southwest corner of the property.
Residential lots would be separated from the proposed Industrial Park by
66 acres of steep bluffs, preserved as open space, which separate the mesa
to the south from the floor of the Otay River Valley. Portions of the
northwest corner of the property lie within the 100 year floodplain and
contain wetlands habitat.
The site was annexed to the City from the City of San Diego in September
of 1986 and was prezoned A-8 Agriculture and F-1 Floodway pending approval
of a more specific development proposal.
The Environmental Impact Report and proposed general plan amendment for
this project are discussed in the two preceding reports. Certification of
the final EIR and approval of the General Plan Amendment must take place
prior to consideration of the rezone request.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Certify the Environmental Impact Report as outlined in Recommendation
1 and 2 of the staff report for GPA 87-1.
2. Adopt a motion recommending that the City Council enact an ordinance
to change the zones in effect for the 210 acre parcel located south
of the Otay River on the west side of Otay Valley Road in the extreme
southeast corner of the City of Chula Vista from A-8 Agricultural and
F-1 Floodway to A-8 Agricultural, I-L-P Limited Industrial and F-1
Floodway, as indicated in Exhibit B attached and made a part hereto.
3. Adopt a motion that the City Council deny the applicant's request for
an R-1 Residential zone designation for portions of the subject
property located on the southern boundary and southwest corner of the
parcel, as shown in Exhibit A of this report.
City Planning Commis~ ~n
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 2
C. ANALYSIS
In analyzing the applicant's proposal to rezone 131 acres for limited
industrial uses and 14.1 acres for single family residential uses, the
principle concern is one of timing with respect to providing the
appropriate infrastructure to service the development. The proposed
project would generate approximately 15,216 ADT to Otay Valley Road which
currently has a design ADT of 7,100. Development of the residential
portions of the project are predicated on the development of the property
south of the project to provide road access. School facilities have not
been developed in this area to accommodate students generated from this
project or from the other large residential developments proposed south of
the project site within the City of San Diego. In addition, the City of
San Diego Community Plan for Otay Mesa may be revised to reflect proposed
changes in the noise contours for Brown Field, which in turn could impact
residential development on the property to the south of the project site,
which would provide access to the project's proposed residential lots.
In short, the proposed project at buildout cannot be serviced with the
present level of infrastructure, and timetables for providing that
infrastructure remain uncertain.
By phasing the project so that the first phase of industrial uses does not
generate traffic in excess of the present design ADT of Otay Valley Road,
the applicant is able to time the development so that the overall
intensity of the land uses proposed do not overburden the existing
circulation system. The developer is a participant in a facilities
benefits assessment district formed by the City of San Diego to fund
widening of Otay Valley Road, including the bridge which crosses the Otay
River. A timetable for provision of those improvements has been
established with work currently scheduled to begin in 1998. That schedule
could be expedited if one of the participants in the FBA agrees to
construct the improvements and be reimbursed as other developments
contribute to the fund.
However, proposed project phasing only serves to address traffic
generation. The problems associated with affording access to the
residential portion of the project and adequate provision of school
facilities still remain, with no firm plans or timetable to gear a phasing
plan for proposed development.
In light of these issues, staff is recommending that the Commission
recommend approval of proposed rezoning for the industrial park only.
Rezoning for residential uses should not occur until the infrastructure
needed to serve those land uses is either in place or a reliable timetable
is established for their provision.
Finally, biologically sensitive riparian habitat has been identified in
the northwest corner of the site constituting approximately 5.52 acres.
Although the applicant has agreed to preserve this area as open space,
most of the riparian area would still retain the I-L-P zone under the
development proposal submitted to staff. Staff is recommending that Lot 1
F-1 within the floodway and A-8 for the balance of the lot in order to
more accurately reflect the intent to preserve the riparian area as part
of the Otay River wetlands system.
WPC 3993P/O837P
EXHIBIT A
OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK. .EzouE~x.mrr.
.PROPOSED REZONE REQUEST
EXHIBIT B
OTAY RIO BUSINESS PARK. .EZO.~
STAFF RECOMMENDATION ~--~.__~_.~.'~
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 1
2.C. PUBLIC HEARING PCS-87-6: Consideration of tentative subdivision map
for Otay Rio Business Park, Chula Vista Tract 87-6 -
- Otay Rio Business Park
A. BACKGROUND
The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as Otay Rio
Business Park, Chula Vista Tract 87-6, in order to subdivide a 211.3 acre
parcel into 78 lots for limited industrial uses, 49 lots for residential uses,
one lot for commercial uses servicing the industrial park, and 2 lots totaling
72.33 acres, as open space. The subdivision application has been filed in
conjunction with an EIR, general plan amendment rezone and precise plan.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Certify the EIR as outlined in Recommendation numbers 1 and 2 of the
staff report for GPA 87-1, preceding this report.
2. Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt
a motion recommending that the City Council approve the tentative
subdivision map for Otay Rio Business Park, Chula Vista Tract 87-6,
subject to the following conditions:
a. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of full
public improvements for all streets shown on the Tentative Map
within the Subdivision. Said improvements shall include but not
be limited to: A.C. pavement, base, curb, gutter, sidewalk,
sewer and water facilities, drainage facilities, street trees,
street lights and signs. All improvements required for each
unit shall be guaranteed prior to approval of any Final
Subdivision maps for said unit.
b. In the event that residential unit 3 precedes development of the
land adjacent to the southerly boundary of this project the
developer shall guarantee adequate legal access to said unit
prior to approval of Final Map. Access shall consist of access
easements or street dedication sufficient to provide a paved
roadway having a minimum width of 24 feet for 2 traffic lanes
plus 5 foot paved shoulders for emergency parking.
Said roadway shall be incorporated in the Subdivision
Improvement Agreement for Unit 3 and shall include AC berms or
redwood headers along both edges of pavement and adequate street
lights to conform with lighting standards for urban areas. It
should be noted that said location is within the City of San
Diego and approval of the plans for this off-site street by that
agency will be required.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 2
3. The developer shall be responsible for the payment of all direct
and incidental costs for the provision and maintenance of sewage
metering stations at all proposed connections to the San Diego
Metropolitan Sewer System.
4. The developer shall grant easements for all off-site public
storm drains prior to the approval of any of the Final Maps for
units requiring said off-site systems.
5. Paved access shall be provided to all sewer manholes and to all
public storm drain structures located within developable lots.
Graded access shall be provided to all public storm drain
structures.
6. The Engineering Geology and Soils Report to be submitted with
the Improvement and Grading Plans shall contain specific
recommendations regarding the following areas of concern:
a) Slope stability of natural cut and fill slopes located in
the southern part of the subdivision, specifically in
residential areas of Units 2 and 3.
b) Earth fill located at top of cut slope of lots 79 and 80.
c) Existing dump fill near northeast corner of subdivision.
d) Stability of cut slope in dam fill, material located at the
toe of fill slope to the south of lot 84.
7. The developer shall obtain notarized letters of permission for
all off-site grading work prior to issuance of grading permit
for work requiring said off-site grading.
8. The developer shall provide access to the 27-inch sewer main as
required by the City of San Diego. Access shall include, but
not be limited to access easements and improved access roads.
9. The developer shall obtain permission from the City of San Diego
for grading work within the San Diego sewer easement prior to
approval of plans.
10. The developer shall submit a preliminary engineering study for
the Otay Valley Road alignment to eliminate two substandard
curves in the roadway, one adjacent to the easterly subdivision
boundary, and one southerly of the subdivision. The study shall
include horizontal and vertical alignments conforming to current
County standards for a prime arterial and shall indicate the
extent of grading which would be required to construct such a
road. The property owners shall make an irrevocable offer of
dedication for right-of-way within the subdivision boundary
identified as necessary for installation of said roadway and
shall grant slope easements as necessary.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 3
ll. Access rights to Otay Valley Road shall be relinquished from all
lots abutting on Otay Valley Road.
12. The developer shall be responsible for the construction of Otay
Valley Road along the entire frontage of the eastern subdivision
boundary to current Chula Vista prime arterial standards.
13. The property owners shall waive the right to protest formation
of a Street Improvement District for Otay Valley Road, and shall
waive the right to protest formation of a Facilities Benefit
Assessment District for facilities impacted by development of
the subject property.
14. The developer shall enter into a development agreement to
participate in a Facilities Benefit Assessment District.
15. The developer shall be responsible for widening Otay Valley Road
crossing over the Otay River and approaching roadways at such
time as the traffic volume crossing the river at this point
reaches 7500 A.D.T. If traffic volumes exceed this value as
determined by the City Engineer, no further building permits
will be issued for the subject development until the above
improvements are under construction. A permit may be required
from the Army Corps of Engineers for said work.
16. The developer shall provide protection for any slopes, building
pads, or buildings subject to being impacted by a lO0-year
flood. Said protection shall be in accordance with City, State
and Federal standards.
17. The developer shall pay Chula Vista sewer participation fees
prior to approval of any Final Subdivision maps.
18. The developer shall pay any impact fees to include, but not be
limited to sewer, street, or general facilities impact fees,
which may be imposed prior to approval of any Final Subdivision
maps.
19. The developer shall submit for recordation of the final map in
phases, the first phase to consist of lots 7-10, 12-40 and
74-81. Succeeding phases shall not be recorded until such time
as the alignment and widening of Otay Valley Road to four lanes
and the widening of the bridge crossing the Otay River is
guaranteed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
20. Lots 1 and 81 shall be dedicated to the City in fee title as
open space. The developer shall request the formation of an
open space maintenance district prior to recordation of the
final map for the phase that these lots are included within.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 4
21. The portion of the map within lot 1 identified as a Riparian
area shall remain undisturbed and maintained in its natural
state. A lO0-foot landscape buffer shall be planted around the
riparian area and shall consist of dense native species. The
portion of lot 1 marked open space park shall be planted with
native plant materials and shall extend from the Riparian Area
to the property boundary of lot 62.
22. Lot 2 shall be retained under an open space easement and shall
be developed as a private, active use park for use by employees
of the industrial park. Prior to recordation of the final map
for this phase, a park plan shall be submitted for review and
approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation, and Parks and
Recreation Commission. Proposed grading on lot 2 shall be
revised to eliminate the proposed 2:1 slopes and to instead
provide a gradual incline into the Floodplain. Revised grading
is subject to review and approval by the Department of Planning
and Department of Engineering. Maintenance of the park shall be
the responsibility of a property owners association. Prior to
recordation of the Final Map, CC&R's for the property owners
association shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Department.
23. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a transplantation program
to transfer barrel cactus existing on site to a location
approved by the City Landscape Architect shall be implemented.
24. The property boundaries of lots ll through 18 and lot 80
adjacent to Otay Valley Road shall be graded in slopes not to
exceed 3-1/2:1 in conjunction with placement of a 6-foot-high
wall, berm or building construction to reduce ambient noise
levels to 45 dBA or less for areas inside the building. That
portion of the properties between the wall and the right-of-way,
including the wall, shall be dedicated in fee title as open
space and included in the proposed open space maintenance
district.
~5. Lot 81 shall be fenced and revegetated with native species to
the satisfaction of the City Landscape Architect and shall be
hydroseeded between the months of October and February. A
master plan for revegetation with a phasing plan shall be
submitted and is subject to review and approval by the City
Landscape Architect prior to recordation of the final map or
approval of grading permits, whichever event occurs first.
26. Delete lots 82 through 130 from the tentative map. Lots 82
through 125 may be incorporated in a single lot followed by one
additional lot incorporating lots 126-130.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 5
27. A Permission to Grade letter shall be obtained from San Diego
Gas and Electric for grading within the existing easement shown
on the tentative map prior to recordation of the final map.
28. The developer shall provide natural gas on site prior to
issuance of any building permits for phase 1 of the tentative
map.
29. Fire hydrants shall be provided on site; 17 shall be installed
with phase l, the location and type to be approved by the City
Fire Marshal, and 19 hydrants to be installed with subsequent
phases subject to approval by the City Fire Marshal.
30. Fire flow of 2,500 gpm shall be provided on site. All buildings
shall be sprinkled to the satisfaction of the City Fire Marshal.
31. The developer shall retain a qualified paleontologist on site to
monitor the original cutting of previously undisturbed
formations to inspect cuts for contained fossils. In the event
that well preserved fossils are discovered, the paleontologist
shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading
to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Fossil
remains collected during the salvage program shall be cleaned,
sorted and cataloged and, with the owner's permission, deposited
in a scientific institution with paleontological collections
such as the San Diego Natural History Museum.
32. The developer shall retain a qualified historic resources
monitor on site during excavation of the dump site used by the
farmhouse structure. In the event historic resources are
discovered, the monitor shall have the authority to temporarily
direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of historic
resources in a timely manner.
33. A temporary wall or mesh fence shall be placed along the eastern
site boundary adjacent to Otay Valley Road during construction
of buildings.
34. A list of proposed street names shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for review and approval prior to Council
consideration of the project.
Code Requirements
The following are not conditions of approval, but are required under
the authority of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
1. The developer shall pay Traffic Signal Participation fees in
accordance with City Council policy prior to issuance of
building permits.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 6
2. The developer shall pay all applicable sewer fees, including but
not limited to Sewer Participation Fee, prior to issuance of
building permits.
3. The developer shall underground all existing overhead facilities
lying within the subdivision. All utilities serving the
subdivision shall be undergrounded.
4. All grading work shall be done in accordance with the City of
Chula Vista Landscape Manual and Grading Ordinance 1797 as
amended.
5. The developer shall install street trees in accordance with
Section 18.28.10 of Chula Vista Municipal Code.
6. The developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of Final Maps and all
plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the
Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision
Manual of the City of Chula Vista.
C. TENTATIVE MAP
The proposed tentative map is designed to develop a parcel of 211+ acres
into a 79-1ot industrial park located on the southern terrace of a portion of
the Otay River Valley, with 49 single-family residential lots situated at the
edge of the mesa overlooking the river valley. The residential lots would be
separated from the industrial park by 66.3 acres of steep north facing slopes
which separate the mesa from the river valley.
The industrial park would contain 78 lots engaged in limited industrial
uses, ranging in size from .90 to 2.85 acres each. One lot consisting of 4.45
acres would carry commercial uses serving the surrounding industrial park, and
would be regulated through a Master CUP in conjunction with the precise plan.
Since portions of the northwestern corner of the property lie within the
lO0-year floodplain and floodway and contain riparian habitat associated with
the Otay River wetlands system, that area would be contained within one 5.52
acre lot and preserved as open space.
The street network proposed on the map for the industrial park shows
streets "A", "B" and "C" forming a loop with ingress and egress to Otay Valley
Road. This loop is bisected at two points by streets "E" and "G". Access to
interior lots 25-27 and 32-34 would be through cul-de-sac "F" which is
extended south from street "A". By the same token, cul-de-sac "D" provides
access to interior lots 47-50 and 53-56, and also extends southward from
street "A".
Street "A" would terminate in a knuckle which connects to street "C".
However, the developer is requesting that a 72-foot street reservation to
extend from the terminus of street "A" to the western boundary of the property
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 7
in the event that the property adjacent to the western boundary of the
industrial park develops at some point in the future and requires access
through this project.
The residential portion of the proposed subdivision would contain 49 lots
with a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. Sole access to the residential
lots would come from a proposed residential development in the preliminary
planning stages within the jurisdiction of the City of San Diego. That
project has not, however, received any formal approvals, and the street system
and location of lots are subject to change, if the project is permitted to
proceed.
The north facing slopes contained within an open space lot would remain in
a natural state except for grading necessary to provide a 30-foot-wide general
utility and access easement.
C. ANALYSIS
The conditions of approval proposed by staff for the tentative subdivision
map were developed to address unique constraints associated with the property,
which include:
1. lack of infrastructure to serve the site, and
2. environmental concerns associated with its location in the Otay River
Valley.
1. Lack of Infrastructure
The question of the infrastructure required to serve the site,
discussed in part in the Analysis portion of the staff report
concerning the rezone request, centers around the timing provision of
adequate roads, schools, and fire protection.
The proposed project at buildout would generate approximately 15,216
ADT to Otay Valley Road which currently has a design ADT of 7,500,
with two lanes. Otay Valley Road currently carries a traffic load of
approximately 1400 ADT. Widening of Otay Valley Road to increase the
capacity to accommodate the increases in traffic is contingent upon
widening the bridge crossing the Otay River. The developer is
currently a participant in an FBA fo~med by the City of San Diego
which would widen the bridge to the ultimate capacity of Otay Valley
Road; however, completion of the work is not anticipated until the
year 2001.
Since the widening of the bridge is not anticipated for another 14
years, the conditions of approval {numbers 15 and 19) allow only the
first phase of development to record a final map. The developer must
also enter into a development agreement which places a cap halting
issuance of building permits for the project site once the traffic
crossing the bridge reaches 7500 ADT from any source, until widening
of the bridge is complete.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 8
With the phasing plan proposed by the developer, development for the
first lO-14 years would be limited to the first phase consisting of
approximately 50 acres of industrial lots.
The development of Phase 1 of the industrial park will also involve
difficulties in providing adequate fire protection, due to excessive
response times required to reach the site. The City of San Diego
anticipates construction of a fire station near Brown Field to be
completed in 1991 which could serve the project site under an
existing reciprocal agreement with the City of Chula Vista. However,
until such time as the fire station is completed, the City Fire
Marshal is requiring all buildings in the industrial park to be fully
sprinkled, as stated in Condition 31 of the Conditions of Approval.
The residential portion of the project is included in Unit 3, the
last phase of development. The developer has stated that the timing
involved in implementing this phase would allow the residential
development proposed for the property south of this project to
complete their development. Staff is of the opinion, however, that
the residential portion of the map should be deleted. The
residential project south of this site has no formal approval for any
lot configurations or street networks, so there is no basis for
determining whether the residential portion of Otay Rio Business Park
will actually fit any final development which might be approved by
the City of San Diego.
In conjunction with the uncertainty of development south of this
site, school facilities are not in place in this area to accommodate
students generated from residential developments, and firm plans and
a timetable for providing those facilities have not been determined
at this time.
Accordingly, the requirement to delete proposed residential lots is
included in Condition 27 of the proposed Conditions of Approval.
2. Environmental Constraints
The location of the proposed industrial park places it between the
Otay River, and the wetlands habitat associated with that, and the
steep slopes separating the river valley from the mesa to the south
of the project site. Each of these features must be contained in
open space to mitigate adverse environmental impacts which would
occur as a result of disturbances to these areas.
The northwest corner of the subject property lies within the lO0-year
flood plain and the floodway. The biological analysis performed for
the project identifies the area within the floodplain as a riparian
woodland. Proposed mitigation identified in the EIR requires that
the riparian woodland be preserved in open space, as shown on lot 1
of the tentative map. Conditions 20 and 21 of the conditions of
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 9
approval also require the lot to be dedicated as open space and
planted with a lO0-foot landscape buffer consisting of dense riparian
native species.
In addition to retention of lot 1 as open space, staff is
recommending that lot 2 be retained under an open space easement and
maintained as an active use park by a property owner's association.
Retention of lot 2 for a park site provides a buffer for the riparian
habitat along the east side, where the present proposal shows a 2:1
slope to create a building pad for industrial uses.
Open space dedicated for riparian habitat and native plants in lot 1
are not designed to address the recreational needs of business park
employees, but to preserve a portion of the existing wetlands system.
The development of lot 2 as an active use private park would serve to
address the need for passive and active recreational areas for
business park employees who, due to the isolation of the project site
have no recreational facilities for use nearby. The proposed
requirement is included in condition 22 of the conditions of approval.
The largest area proposed for dedication as open space within the
project site is the 66.23 acre open space lot consisting of the steep
north facing slopes separating the river valley from the mesa. The
slopes are severely scarred from off-road vehicle activity. Staff is
recommending that the slopes be revegetated prior to dedication to
the City as open space, and fenced to protect any further degradation
of the hillside. This is reflected in Condition 20.
In summary, the conditions of approval proposed in conjunction with
the tentative map serves to time the intensity of development with
the steady provision of urban services and infrastructure to the
general area as Otay Mesa develops. It also concentrates on the
design of the development to provide sensitive treatment of the
wetlands system occurring along the Otay River and the slopes
occurring along the southern boundary of the River Valley. With
incorporation of the conditions, it is appropriate to recommend
approval of the tentative map.
E. FINDING
Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative
subdivision map for Otay Rio Business Park, Chula Vista Tract 87-6, is found
to be in conformance with the various elements of the City's General Plan
based on the following:
1. The site is physically suitable for the industrial development and
the proposal conforms to all standards established by the City for
such projects.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page l0
2. The design of the subdivision will not affect the existing
improvements -- streets, sewers, etc. -- which have been designed to
avoid any serious problems.
3. ~he project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista
General Plan Elements as follows:
a. Land Use - The industrial development is in conformance with the
Industrial Development Principles outlined in the Land Use
Element of the General Plan.
b. Circulation - By phasing the project to time development with
the provision of an adequate road system to accommodate traffic,
the project complies with the Circulation Element of the General
Plan.
c. Housing As conditioned the tentative map will not impose
housing to the area prior to the provision of schools, parks,
fire protection and roads to service those residences.
d. Conservation Preservation of biologically sensitive areas
within the project site conforms to the Conservation Element of
the General Plan.
e. Park and Recreation, Open Space - The proposed project provides
66 acres of open space and a 2.11 acre private park in concert
with these elements of the General Plan.
f. Seismic Safety - The proposed project contains no known faults
and thereby conforms to the Seismic Safety Element.
g. Safety The proposed project, in requiring additional fire
safety measures to buildings to mitigate the effects of long
fire response times, conforms to the Seismic Safety Element.
h. Noise - Incorporation of a 6-foot wall or berm along the eastern
property boundary serves to shield noise impacts in concert with
the Noise Element of the General Plan.
i. Scenic Highway - The project site is not located in proximity to
a designated Scenic Highway.
j. Bicycle Routes - The project site is not located adjacent to a
designated bicycle route.
k. Public Buildings No public buildings are proposed for the
project site.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page ll
4. Pursuant to Section 66412.2 of the Subdivision Map Act, the
Commission certifies that it has considered the effect of this
approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced those
needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City
and the available fiscal and environmental resources.
WPC 4000P/2659P
OT~7/RIO BUSINESS"3ARK
15 6
OTAY
14
CITY OF
~'5C PRO. TECT ~11 E
19 ~ 16
[
17
Field
N.A.A.S.
OTA Y MESA ROAD
0 2000 '4000
FEET · 3·0o0 -
5000
1000
PROJECT VICINITY ~4~
PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS
Keller
Environmental
Associates Inc.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 1
3. Consideration of Final EIR-87-4 Plaza Bonita Apartments
A. Background
The Draft of this EIR was the subject of a public hearing before the
Planning Commission on June lO, 1987. Considerable testimony was taken
that meeting which has now, along with responses and changes to the text,
been incorporated into the Final EIR.
There have been several changes in the text of the Final EIR which are
outlined below.
B. Recommendation
Because of the following recommendations regarding the project itself, it
is recommended that no action on the Final EIR take place at this time and
that the document be filed.
C. ~nalysis
The Final EIR differs from the Draft in several respects including the
following:
1. Transportation/Access
The report concludes that although the project would have a minimal
impact on the level-of-service provided by the existing street
system, it would exacerbate an existing cumulatively significant
traffic congestion problem. This is also a quality-of-life impact
for nearby residents and users of the system. The applicant has
proposed to finance improvements beyond that which are to be
implemented by CalTrans and the City of Chula Vista (see attached
memo from Senior Civil Engineer Daoust).
2. Land Use
The project would create a higher density development than presently
allowed, and the potential developed character of the site would
change from medium density single-family to high density
multiple-family residential. This would result in an incompatibility
with adjacent single-family residential development.
Design features incorporated into the proposed project would be made
conditions of approval on the Precise Plan and would be subject to
the review and approval of the Design Review Committee. These
features would ensure that the project would be compatible with the
higher density development to the north, and would partially reduce
conflicts with lower density uses to the south. However, complete
mitigation of adverse land use impacts in relations to the lower
density uses would only be achieved by implementation of an
alternative project.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 2
D. Alternative Actions
Because the Final EIR does identify significant and unmitigatable
environmental impacts, an evaluation of alternatives which could be
environmentally superior is necessary. Two such alternatives are
identified in the Final EIR, they are:
1. Development Under Existing Land Use Designations
This alternative (i.e., no General Plan Revision, rezone or precise
plan) would allow development of the site per current General Plan
and zoning designations. As noted in Chapter 3.3 of Final EIR Land
Use, medium density residential uses could be developed on-site
without a zone change or General Plan amendment. Approximately 18 to
55 single-family dwelling units at a maximum density of 12 units per
gross acre are allowed with a zone change. The current zoning limits
lot sizes to a minimum of 7,000 square feet. Therefore, the 4.6-acre
project site could produce a maximum of roughly 28 single-family
dwelling units.
A significant reduction in dwelling units would result with this
alternative as compared to the proposed project (i.e., a maximum of
roughly 28 units compared to the proposed 96 units). Rather than the
proposed high density apartment complex, this alternative would allow
development of medium density detached single-family units. These
housing types would generate less population, less demand for public
services, and less traffic (approximately 288 ADT as opposed to 768
ADT) than the proposed project. In summary, this alternative
provides the potential for a reduction in some site specific impacts.
2. Reduced Density Project
This alternative would involve development of the project site with a
lower density development than currently proposed. The current
General Plan designation would allow up to roughly 18-55 dwelling
units on the 4.6-acre site. Development at this density (rather than
the proposed 96 units) would permit a less intensive site design.
The project could utilize one- to two-story units, to reduce the
height and mass of the buildings. A lower density development would
avoid or reduce visual impacts to the nearly single-family
residences, generate less traffic, and would create less demand for
public services.
E. CEQA Findings
If the Commission follows the staff recommendation, no CEQA Findings would
be required at this time. If another course of action is followed, CEQA
Findings will be prepared and presented to the Commission at a later date.
WPC 4001P
June 16, 1987
File # YE-024
TO: Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator
FROM: Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer ~
SUBJECT: Traffic Information for EIR 87-4
During the public hearing for the draft of the subject EIR several questions
were raised concerning provisions that are being made for improving the traffic
carrying abilities of streets in the vicinity of the proposed Plaza Bonita
Apartment project. The projects that the City is involved in are as follows:
1. The overall Traffic Control Computer system for the City.
The firm of JHK and Associates has been selected as the City's consultant
for the design phase of the project. A draft work program, cost
estimates, and contract are being prepared by them. These materials are
expected to be submitted to the Director of Public Works within the coming
week. The final contract should be to Council for approval in early July.
Actual design work would start in July and be completed by January 1988.
System implementation and evaluation should begin in approximately July,
1988 and be complete in approximately July, 1989.
2. Bonita Road/Bonita Glen Traffic Signal.
Installation of facilities is almost complete. The signals are to be
turned on as soon as pedestrian signals are received and installed.
3. "Mini" signal interconnect on Bonita Road at 1-805.
Interconnection of the traffic signals at the intersections of Bonita Road
with Flower Street; Bonita Glen; Southbound 1-805 ramps; Northbound 1-805
ramps and Plaza Bonita Road should start the week of July 7, 1987. The
interconnection of the signals at these five intersections should be
completed and in operation by the end of July. This project is intended
to improve traffic flow through the area by reducing interruptions caused
by existing signals.
Doug Reid -2- June 16, 1987
4. Installation of double left-turn lanes at southbound 1-805 ramps.
Caltrans has indicated that they will be unable to finish the project
before Thanksgiving, 1987. The City is negotiating to take the lead on
this project to work for completion prior to the Christmas season. We are
currently reviewing the plans and specificaions prepared by Caltrans in
preparation for final approval and going to bid. The
improvements/modificatons included in this project are indicated in the
attached exhibit. Upon completion of this work the "mini-interconnect"
will be adjusted to maximize these improvements.
RLD:ljr/yc
(B15:EIR87-4.FYI)
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 1
4.a. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-8?-3, Proposal to amend the Chula Vista General
Plan by the redesignation of a certain 4.56 acre
~arcel o~ land, located at the southwester)y corner o)
E" Street and (Old) Bonita Road, from Medium Density
Residential (4 to 12 dwelling units per gross acre) tu
High Density Residential (13 to 26 dwelling units per
gross acre) on the plan diagram of the Land Us~
Element.
A. BACKGROUND
1. The applicant, Stafford Gardner, proposes to develop a 96-dwelling
unit multi-family dwelling complex on a certain, 4.56-acre site,
located at the southwesterly corner of "E" Street and Old Bonita
Road. The proposed amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan is
prerequisite to the rezoning of the subject site to a classification
which would accommodate the said complex.
2. PCZ-87-K, request to rezone the site in question from "R-l, Single
Family Residential, to R-3-P, Multi Family Residential, is a
companion case of the subject proposal to amend the General Plan. In
the event GPA-87-3 is denied approval, the approval of PCZ-87-K would
not, of course, be appropriate or defensible.
3. A Draft Environmental Review Report, EIR-87-4, was prepared under the
aegis of the Environmental Review Coordinator.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Certify EIR-87-4, and consider its contents during the review of the
substantive project, GPA-87-3.
2. Adopt a motion to deny GPA-87-3.
C. DISCUSSION
1. Existing site characteristics
The subject site is a vacant triangularly shaped parcel with an area
of 4.56 acres, bounded by "E" Street on the north side, Bonita Road
on the south, and a segment of Hilltop Drive on the west. The site
slopes in an easterly direction and contains a cluster of eucalyptus
trees at its northwesterly corner, along "E" Street.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 2
2. Adjacent General Plan designations. (Please see Exhibit A.)
The plan diagram of the Land Use Element of the General Plan
designates the project site as Medium Density Residential, 4 to 12
units per gross acre. The adjacent designations are as follows:
North: Medium and high density residential
South: Medium density residential
East: Low density residential
West: Medium density residential
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use (Please see Exhibit B.)
North: R-3-P-16 Apartments (Eucalyptus Grove)
South: R-1 Single-family dwellings
East: R-3-P-16 Apartments (Eucalyptus Grove)
West: R-1 Single-family dwellings
With the inclusion of one-half of the area of the adjoining streets,
the project site contains an area of approximately 5.65 gross acres.
Therefore, the maximum number of dwelling units permitted by the
General Plan is approximately 68 acres.
The segment of "E" Street that is adjacent to the site is designated
as a "gateway" into the City by the Scenic Highway Element of the
General Plan. If the aforementioned project were allowed, special
consideration would need to be given to its architectural design,
height, landscaping and siting in order to meet the goals and
objectives of the said element.
D. ANALYSIS
1. The subject site, located at the southwesterly corner of Old Bonita
Road and "E" Street, is an integral part of the single-family fabric
of the interface between the Central Chula Vista and Bonita
Communities. Most of the adjacent levels are platted into large
lots, and developed with single-family dwellings.
2. While the lands on the northerly side of "E" Street, opposite the
said site, are being developed as a high-density residential project,
it is very doubtful that this type of project could be replicated on
the southerly side of "E" Street + without eroding the single-family
residential fabric referred to in-the above paragraph. The subject
area's suburban character is fragile and vulnerable, and its ability
to endure high-density residential incursions is very limited.
3. The proposed increase in the texture or gross residential density of
the site in question would increase the traffic on Old Bonita Road,
which functions as a principal connector between the Central Chula
Vista and Bonita Communities, even though it lacks the appropriate
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 3
design for the job. This increase would not be consistent with the
suburban-residential order of the subject subneighborhood.
4. The proposed amendment would also tend to increase traffic on the "E"
Street-Bonita Road artery. Although this increase, by itself, would
not be considerable, it would incrementally contribute to the
continuing cumulative overburdening of the traffic-service capacity
of Bonita Road.
5. The applicant has not submitted evidence in support of the
densification of territory at the gateway to Bonita, and has not
alleged and proven a community need to alter the involved
subneighborhood's existing residential pattern.
E. CONCLUSION
The proposed General Plan amendment would adversely affect the
single-family dwelling fabric, as well as the order, amenity, and
stability of the involved subneighborhood. It would not meet a
discernible, community need. The Planning Department, therefore, believes
that the proposed amendment is not supportable.
WPC 3262P
· ~ MED~. DENSITY RESIDENTIAL '1' = 400*
~ HIGH DENSITYRESIDENTIAL' ~ EXHIBIT A
/ SITE LOCATION
~ .ET~,L CO~ME.C,~L / .AND
PARKS & PUBLIC OPEN S~ACE
I
FLOWER ST. ',
ROSEBANK
SUBJECT SI
E
BONITA ROAD __
SANE
DAVIDSON ST.
MONTEBEL
EXHIBIT B ·
EXISTINGPLAN ZONING
NORTH
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
I, A?PLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN O~ERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
HICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
OMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
John W. Gardner, Jr, Karen Kaye Gardner
Mary Leu Gardner
Will Donald Gardner
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Conr~issions, Co~ittees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No X If yes, please indicate person(s)
'Person is defined as: 'Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,
~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate,
this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other
political subdivision, or any other group or combination ac, i,t~ng as a unit.'
{NOTE: Attgch additional pages as necessary.)~
_ 6/16/86
Signature~f applicant/date
WPC 070]P W~ll Donald Gardner
A-l]0 P~int or type name of applicant
June 15, 1987
Chula Vista Planning Commission
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Dear Commission Members:
After reviewing the environmental report on the proposed Plaza
Bonita Apartment complex and attending the Planning Commission
meeting of June 10th, we wish to comment.
We have been residents of Bonita Rd. for over 32 years. When
we bought our homes they, and the surrounding area, were in an
R-1 Zone. Our homes represent a major investment, and not just
a financial investment. We object to the report's conclusions.
We do not agree that the following represent "no unavoidable
significant environmental impact", as per the report.
1. 768 additional car trips per day, and all that represents
2. noise - insulate walls etc. for the apartment dwellers,
what about the existing residents?
3. inconsistant with both the city's general plan and the
zoning ordinance - "incompatible with adjacent single
family dwellings"
4. Junior High and Elementary schools unable to absorb
additional students busing is not acceptable
5. Setbacks and landscaping will not hide the buildings
WHAT WOULD CREATE A SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IS~PACT?
You, as a responsible governing body, must realize what has
already been put on this once quiet neighborhood. A projection
of 240 people, 161 cars, two and three story structures may seem
insignificant to those who made the study, but not to us. The
developers of Eucalyptis Grove have already destroyed a portion
of our "Scenic Highway, Gateway to the City". The residents
of this area have already absorbed enough growth. It is time
that the citizens of Chula Vista and the quality of life in
our city be considered. Please retain this as an R-1 zone or
a more restrictive designation.
Thank you for your serious study and consideration.
R. A~. ~Hale and Betty 'Gene Hale
38 Bonita Road, Chula Vista 92010 ~¥~...~._~ ..... .~.~ .........
Helen Couture
26 Bonita Road, Chula Vista 92010 PLANhiNG DEPART ' IENT
CI ULA \IISTA, C, LIFORFIIA
,JOAQUIN J. RAM1REZ, M. D.
R E,~ E I V ~. D 480 fourth AVENUe, SUITE 511
GHULA VISTA, CA. 92010
TELEPHONg 619 585-3655
PLANNING
CHULA VISTA, CALIFOSi t-,
June 9, 1987
Chula Vista Planning Commission
267 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Gentlemen:
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed Stafford-Gardner
multiapartment complex on Bonita Road and E Street.
The notion of inserting 96 apartment units in an area that already has
a traffic bottleneck should not be acceptable to you. Chula Vista citizens
living in this area already face enough traffic problems without this
proposed project, which in any case, does not comply with the city's general
plan.
This is an opportunity for the Planning commission to side with the general
public against narrow special interests.
Joaquin J. Ramirez, M.D.
JJR/lb
C.UL^.V.S A. C^L,FO..,^ 920'' R E C E I..V.E.D
June 15, 1987
JUN 1 6
City Planning Commission PLANNING DEPARTMEIIT
Chula vista, CA 92010 CHULAVISTA,CALIFORNIA
Re: Plaza Bonita Apartment Project
Ladies & Gentlemen of the Planning Commission:
I regret I was unable to attend the Public Hearing Wednesday, June 10, so I am
writing this letter in lieu of being there.
I'm sure by now you are aware of the congestion and confusion that already takes
place at the intersection of Bonita Road and E Street. To illustrate the confuslon,~
as you may know, there are four light standards at that corner that serve additionally
as street signs. At this intersection, coming from the east one sign reads Flower
Stree, one E Street and two read Bonita Road, but from west to east only Bonita Road
is seen frontally. I don't know how or if this can be improved upon, but it does
speak quietly to the confusion that already exists.
As I understand it, Mr. Gardner and his partner are asking to build 96 more units
on this piece of ground. I know Mr. Gardner and his son from the San Diego Country
Club where we are all three enthusiastic members. We likely have more enthusiasm for
the game than talent. However, the proposed property site is very little bigger than
our practice green and much much smaller than the 6½ acre piece of property being sold
by the Country Club in which only 26 units will be allowed.
I cannot believe that anyone seriously intends that the area in question, which
is 4.6 acres, would sustain an invasion of 96 units. Somehow I get the feeling that
96 units are simply a straw man. is it proposed for those of us who would be impacted
by overcrowding to rail against? Then in due time the compromise would be something
like 16 units and the concerned all taking bows for being so conciliatory. The area
will not support 16 units, let alone the straw man figure of 96 currently proposed.
However, the most important consideration likely hasn't been mentioned yet. That
is the matter of the health hazard this will present. This area is the bottom of the
sewage drainage area of the single family homes that surround it.
If not mentioned before, this may come as somewhat of a surprise, but at least
30 to 40 of the homes that surround this area to the west and south are not on city
sewer. All have septic tanks with or without leach lines. Consequently, the area in
question at the bottom of the hill has received the seepage and continued perculation
of sewage over the last 20 to 40 years from the single family homes that have been
there. As a result the area in question has become a gravity flow cesspool and because
of the topography it will continue to be the same.
This will become a significant health hazard if overcrowding is allowed to take
place. If reasonable building density, namely single family dwellings are allowed,
it will not.
Plaza Bonita Apartments -2-
As it is, I can take any sophomore medical student and go down into that property
and culture at least a half dozen species of salmonella. This is the organism that
causes typhoid fever, it may surprise you to know that we have about 60 to 100 cases
of reported typhoid a year in California, 20 to 40 which will be in San Diego. There
are 33 case reports to the State of California Health & Welfare Agency as of last week.
This does not include the unreported cases. This figure can be confirmed by their
bulletin which hangs on the information board at Scripps Memorial Hospital, Chula Vista.
Typhoid of course is not the only concern with salmonella. It is a leading cause
of food poisoning which can cause severe dehydration and death in young children and
older people. Then one has to consider shigella, numerous species of which cause the
serious bacilary dysentery. They too can cause severe dehydration and death in children
and older people. Much more common and familiar are the sewage water born virus of both
hepatitis A & B. By themselves they constitute enough of a serious problem. A host
of less common diseases: Well's disease, polio and hundreds of colon bacteria are to
be considered.
Now all this being true, why do we not have epidemics of these diseases now? The
answer is simple. The 30 to 40 homes surrounding this area with their septic tanks are
single family dwellings and there is no overcrowding. Overcrowding is the cause and
relief of overcrowding is the cure due to waste dispersal. In single family homes
there is room for dissipation and oxidation of these bacteria and viruses in question.
With the proposed overcrowding there will not be.
Even though the proposed units will have proper sewage management the ground there
will always be contaminated du'e to continuous seepage and remain a serious health hazard.
With overcrowding this continuous seepage from the surrounding area will not have the
necessary room for dispersion and oxidation.
IN SUMMARY: If 26 units have been allowed on a 6.2 acre piece of property along
the San Diego Country Club area, how can 96 units even be proposed on an area of 4.6
acres? For a builder to even propose that kind of density population, not on them-
selves, but on those of us who live in the area is an unsurpassed outrage.
SECONDLY: The whole area south of Bonita Road and west of the shopping mall has
always been and should remain single family dwellings. It is grossly unfair to the
home owners of that area to bring in multiple units which will signlficantly affect
the value of their property as well as disrupt the peace and quiet for which they have
paid dearly.
THIRD: The area cannot adequately handle the trafficthat is now overloading the
limited access and egress from that area.
FOURTH: Even though parking, I'm sure, is somehow built into the plan, everyone
knows that with visitors, 2 & 3 car families with boats and RVs, the parking is guar-
anteed to be inadequate. This means that there will be overflow parking onto the city
streets creating traffic load problems and the usual and unavoidable eye sores.
FIFTH: This kind of "pack them in" housing is the simple formula for a slum
development in a matter of time. Let them "pack them in" in North Park and elsewhere.
Plaza Bonita Apartments -3-
SIXTH: Since sewage will not run up hill, it is not likely that city sewer for
those 30 to 40 homes will ever be on city service since that would require a pumping
station.
SEVENTH AND LAST: There remains the health hazard described above. If other
than single family dwellings, where no overcrowding exists, are allowed to be erected
on that property, the spector of liability for the contracture of one of these ill-
nesses raises its ugly head. Can the City of Chula Vista be held responsible for
the contracture or in the worse scenario, death of some citizen because of poor planning?
All of the above reasons augur against the outrageous proposal of multiple family
dwellings in this area. Let them keep the multiple unit "slum in the making" on the
north side of Bonita Road.
S i/Tx:erel Y/~' ~ ~-
Douglas C. Hill, M.D.
DCH:rh
P.S.: It has been a long time since I was a sophomore medical student, but if anyone
has any doubts, I will be happy to show you that I can culture a half dozen species
of salmonella and at least two shigella from the property in question.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 1
4. b. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-87-K - Consideration to rezone 4.6 acres adjoining
and to the west of the intersection of "E" Street and
Bonita Road from R-1 to R-3 - Stafford Gardner-
Development
A. BACKGROUND
The proposal is to rezone 4.6 acres of property at the intersection of "E"
Street and Bonita Road from R-1 (Single family residential) to R-3
(Multiple family residential). The approval of the companion request to
amend the General Plan from Medium to High Density Residential, GPA-87-3,
is prerequisite to the approval of the rezoning.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion to deny PCZ-87-K.
C. DISCUSSION
Please refer to the General Plan report for existing characteristics of
the site and surrounding area.
D. ANALYSIS
The analysis contained in the staff report on the companion application,
GPA-87-3, is incorporated herein by reference. This analysis concludes
that the proposal for high density development is incompatible with
adjacent single family areas and would not meet a discernable community
need.
WPC 3996P/O837P
.CZ-8?-K
NORTH
~
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 1
5. a. PUBLIC HEARING: GPA-87-2, Proposed General Plan redesignation of a
certain 4.00-acre site, located at the southwesterly
corner of Broadway and Flower Street, from
"Thorou§hfare Commercial" to .,"Thoroughfare Commercial"
and "High Density Residential
A. BACKGROUND
The applicant proposes to develop the subject site's Broadway frontage, to
a depth of 200', with retail and service commercial uses, and the rear of
the site with a high-density residential project. Although the proposed
mixed land use development would ultimately require a rezoning and design
review, the proposed amendment to the plan diagram of the Land Use Element
of the Chula Vista General Plan is prerequisite to further processing.
(Please see Exhibit A for the specific location of the site in question,
and the boundaries of the proposed land-use designations.
B. HISTORICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW NOTES
1. On September 25, 1985, the City Planning Commission conditionally
granted PCC-86-5, a request for a conditional use permit to establish
a 75-dwelling unit apartment project on the rear 380' of the subject
site. PCC-86-5 was subsequently called up on appeal by the City
Council, and on December 3, 1985, was denied approval.
2. The City Planning Commission, on April 23, 1986, under PCA-86-8,
recommended that the City Council amend the C-T zonal regulations,
and thereby preclude the development of residential uses within the
C-T zones through the conditional use permit process. The City
Council enacted the recommended amendment into ordinance on
June 3, 1986.
The amendment of the C-T regulations, therefore, makes the proposed
general plan amendment, and the subsequent rezonin§ of the site in
question prerequisite to the site's residential development.
3. The Negative Declaration issued under IS-85-41, the environmental
assessment of PCC-86-5, was approved by the City Planning Commission
in 1985. It is the opinion of the Environmental Review Coordinator
that the environmental factors which were applicable to PCC-86-5 are
similar to those applicable to the present project and proposal, and
that a new environmental assessment is not required by C.E.Q.A.
C. RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Approve the Draft Negative Declaration issued under IS-85-41.
2. Deny the requested GPA and instruct the secretary to notify the City
Council of this action.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 2
D. BASIC INFORMATION
1. Subject Property
The subject site consists of four parcels of land, with an aggregate
area of 4.00 acres, and is occupied by a used car sales lot, a car
rental lot, automotive repair services, and a multiple-family
residential project.
2. Existing General Plan Designations (Please see Exhibit A.)
North Thoroughfare Commercial & High Density Residential
South Thoroughfare Commercial
East Thoroughfare Commercial
West Elementary School and Visitor Commercial
3. Existing Zoning and Land Use (Please see Exhibit B.)
North C-T & R-3 Automotive Services & Single-Family Dwellings
South C-T Multi-Family Dwellings and Mobile Home Park
East C-T Retail Stores and Services
West C-V-P Elementary School
E. ANALYSIS
1. The existing land-use pattern of the involved subarea supports both
the existing and proposed General Plan designations. Furthermore,
from the standpoint of potential environmental consequences, the said
designations are virtually at parity.
2. Notwithstanding the above comments, the retention of the
"Thoroughfare Commercial" designation on the entire subject site has
one, important city planning advantage--it could provide some of the
additional, underutilized commercial territory essential to a
concerted effort to revitalize the northerly segment of the Broadway
Strip. The need for this revitalization is patently clear, and the
constraints which refute this revitalization are discernible. One of
these constraints--lack of commercial depth--was clearly identified
in the Broadway Study of 1972.
3. The Broadway Study called for the incremental, but methodical
deepening of the commercial strip in question, in order to provide
new and remodeled commercial developments adequate space for
landscaping, off-street parking, and other visual and functional
amenities. The Broadway Strip has been widened and revitalized in
certain areas, in both the Central Chula Vista and Montgomery
Communities, and the prognosis for its future are good. The
reduction of its depth, however, could substantially preclude its
physical and economic resurgence. The text of the Broadway Study, in
part, reads:
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 3
"IV POTENTIAL COMMERCIAL EXPANSION
"The depth of the C-T zone along Broadway is, on the average, not
sufficient to accommodate a well designed commercial enterprise with
adequate space for off-street parking and loading requirements. This
depth, coupled with the small lot sizes, encourages rather small, and
many times marginal, businesses to locate along this strip. There
are many businesses, however, that desire larger sites and find
growth possible by expanding to adjacent lots which are many times
residentially zoned.
"Flower to "E" Streets
"The depth of the C-T zone is 600 feet. No expansion problems are
evident."
4. Conclusions
a. The Planning Department believes that the reduction of the depth
of any of the commercial segments of the Broadway Strip would
impede, if not preclude, its commercial revitalization and
progress.
b. The City of Chula Vista has designated large tracts of land
"High Density Residential" and "Medium Density Residential," and
need not divert commercial territory to residential use in order
to meet its housing needs.
WPC 3485P
-~" STREET
................... ::: ~?~ .::..:..:..: ............ ::::::::::::~
.............--....-....- ............
iii!iiiii!i!iii!iiii!ii~? ~:~:::~!:?'"'""'"".......................................'"'----'"'"'"'"'"'"
.::::::::::::: ............. ~;!~%....-.-..................-
i!!iiii!!iiii~iiii!iiii!!i ~~'~;:/..........................:::::::::::::.....--..........--.....-.=::::::::
:::::::::::::: : i!~!~i!~ii~ .............. ' ......... ::::
FLOWER I( sso.
FEASTER
ELEMENTARY
"E" STREET i
LEGEND (~
VISITOR COMMERCIAL
THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL ~ ' ' ~
HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
PROPOSED HIGH
DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL
TO REMAIN THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL .
~FEASTER ~
~iELEMENTARY ~
-4 .~-q'-
~ ~ STREET
I I I I I I
I
- - , I I I
I ~
i I _[_~_
I
IEXlS?I~ ZO~I~
LA"
FLOWER ST..
USED CAR
AUTO REPAIR
Ai~iu -- S L S' LO.T
STORAGE ~
~ ~ ~ 'OBI'LE HOME ~
~ PARK
0
CO~ MI BCIAL ~ ~m
'E' ST.
COMMERCIAL
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
, ~ , '"~ . ~'~
TWO
FAMILY
DWELLING
Number of Units as shown LAND USE MAP
-
negative declaration
PROJECT NAME: Flower Street/Epsten Apartments
PROJECT LOCATION: The southeast corner of Jefferson Avenue and Flower Street
PROJECT APPLICANT: Bert Epsten, 1835 E1 Cajon Blvd., Suite D,
San Diego, CA 92103
CASE NO: IS-85-41 DATE: May 28, 1985
A. Project Setting
The project site consists of 2.54 acres of previously developed,
relatively. ~at property. A previous land use (automobile dealership)
resulted in the property being paved with asphalt and a chain link fence
being erected around the perimeter.
Adjacent land uses consist of commercial uses to the east across Broadway,
multiple family to the south, single-family to the north across Flower
Street and Feaster Elementary across Jefferson Avenue to the west.
B. Project Description
The project consists of the construction of 78 multiple family units
contained in six two and three story structures. Each of the structures
will be connected by a series of balconies at the second and third floor
levels. A total of ll6 on-site parking spaces are provided in addition to
13 curb side spaces.
C. Compatibility with Zonin~ and Plans
The subject property is currently zoned C-T which requires that a
conditional use permit be obtained for multiple family development.
Multiple family developments located within the C-T zone are required to
be located 200 feet from any major thoroughfare (Broadway). The proposed
project consists of 30.7 dwelling units per net acre which is compatible
with the General Plan.
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
1. Soils
The Engineering Department has indicated that since expansive soils
may be present on the project site, the standard development
requirement for a soils report will apply prior to obtaining building
permits.
city
of chula vista planning department
environmental review section
2. School s
The present enrollment levels at Feaster Elementary and Chula Vista
Jr. High School serving the project area are above capacity.
Implementation of the proposed project may result in the need for
additional classroom space. The developer shall comply with School
District requirements and ensure that adequate school facilities will
be available for students generated from this project.
E. Findings of Insignificant Impact
1. The site is void of any significant natural or manmade resources and
there are no geological hazards on or near the project site.
Standard development requirements will reduce impacts to a level of
insignificance.
2. The residential proposal is consistent with the General Plan and
associated elements and is not anticipated to achieve short term to
the disadvantage of long term environmental goals.
3. No impacts are anticipated to occur which could interact to create a
substantial cumulative effect on the environment.
4. The project will not cause the emission of any harmful substance or
noise which could prove detrimental to the health and welfare of
human beings.
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner
Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer
Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner
Gene Grady, Building and Housing Department
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer
Applicant's Agent: Ron Davis, Architect
2. Documents
IS-84-27 "Just 22" Apartments
The Initial Study application and evaluation forms documenting the findings of
no significant impact are on file and available for public review at the Chula
Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
~TOR
~~AL REVIEW COORDI A
WPC 1966P
EN 6 (Rev. 5/85)
city of chula vista planning department
environmental review section
FN ~ (R~v~ 12/~2~
CITY OF CHULA vISTA
DISCLOSURE STATE~NT
~IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS
~WNICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE. CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING
~COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES.
The following information must be disclosed:
I. List the names of all persons having a f{nancial interest in the application. 'Bert and Bob Investment Co.
Broadway Holdin~ Company
List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
.. Bert.'& Bob Investment' Co,
Broadway Holding Company
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list'
the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation
or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
Bert Epstein Steve ADoel
Bob Epstein Dan Appel
3. If any person identified pursuant to {l) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit
organization or as t~ustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
a/^
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No xx If yes, please indicate person{s)
Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association,
soc-~T~T club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate,
this and any other county, city and county, city, municipalttyj district or other
political subdivision, or any other group or(~~ acting as a unit."
.
(NOTE: Attach additmnal pages as necessary 4./~;~
WPC 0701P ' ~. ~ar~4~ld. Appe~lopment Corporation
A-110 Print or type name of applicant
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 1
5. PUBLIC HEARING: (b) PCZ-87-L - Consideration to rezone 2.6 acres located
at the southeast corner of Flower Street and Jefferson
Avenue from C-T to R-3 - Appel Development Company
A. BACKGROUND
The proposal is to rezone 2.6 acres of property located at the southeast
corner of Flower Street and Jefferson Avenue from C-T (Thoroughfare
commercial) to R-3 (Multiple family residential). The approval of the
companion request to amend the General Plan from Thorough Commercial to
High Density Residential, GPA-87-2, is prerequisite to the approval of the
rezoning.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the findings contained in Section E of this report, adopt a
motion recommending that the City Council enact an ordinance to change the
zone for 2.6 acres at the southeast corner of Flower Street and Jefferson
Avenue from C-T to C-C-P.
C. DISCUSSION
Adjacent zoning and land use.
North R-3 Single-family dwellings
South C-T Multi-family and Trailer park
East C-T Commercial
West C-V-P Elementary school
Existing site characteristics.
The site measures 300 ft. by 380 ft. (2.6 acres) and formerly contained a
car storage facility. The majority of the property is open asphalt-paving
encircled by a chain link fence. Two structures are located on the
southeasterly portion of the site.
General plan.
The General Plan shows the property as Thoroughfare Commercial. The
applicant's request to amend the General Plan to High Density Residential
(4-12 du/ac) is the companion application to this rezoning request.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 2
D. ANALYSIS
The analysis contained in the staff report on the companion application,
GPA-87-2, is incorporated herein by reference, llqis analysis concludes
that a reduction in commercial depth would impede the redevelopment of the
northerly segment of the Broadway strip, and that there is no need for
additional High Density territory to serve the City's housing needs.
The applicant recently received approval of a site plan for a commercial
center fronting on Broadway directly to the east of the project area. It
is staff's position that this has foreclosed the possibility of
accommodating typical thoroughfare commercial uses on the site. Such uses
cater to thoroughfare traffic, require high visibility and ready access,
and would have a greater potential for an adverse impact on adjacent areas
considering that access and orientation would be to Flower Street and/or
Jefferson Avenue.
We therefore have recommended that the property be rezoned to C-C-P
(Central Commercial with Precise Plan). The uses allowed in the C-C zone
are generally less intensive than thoroughfare commercial uses, and thus
will present less potential for conflict with adjacent residents and the
elementary school. Several of the C-C uses are also not dependent upon
thoroughfare frontage.
The Precise Plan Modifying District would require development plans to be
reviewed and approved by the Design Review Committee. Steps would be
taken to ensure that site planning, orientation, architecture and access
are accomplished in a manner most compatible with adjacent areas.
Attached is correspondence from both school districts voicing concerns
about overcrowding in the schools which would serve the students generated
from a residential project on this site. As previously discussed with the
Commission, State law provides that the City cannot deny a project solely
on the basis of inadequate school facilities or overcrowding as long as
the developer pays in-lieu fees to the respective districts.
E. FINDINGS
The "P" Precise Plan Modifying District may be applied to areas when the
following is evident:
1. The subject property, or the neighborhood or area in which the
property is located is unique by virtue of topography, geological
characteristic, access, configuration, traffic circulation or some
social or historic situation requiring special handling of the
development on a precise plan basis.
The property will require access from local streets serving
abutting residences and a public elementary school.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of June 24, 1987 Page 3
2. The property or area to which the P modifying district is applied is
an area adjacent and contiguous to a zone allowing different land
uses and the development of a precise plan will allow the area so
designated to coexist between land usages which might otherwise be
i ncompati bl e.
The property abuts an R-3 zoned area developed with single and
multiple family dwellings.
WPC 3997P/1681P
FEASTER
ELEMENTARY,
I -4 .t--T-
i ~ I
E STREET
I I I ~ I ~
I
I
~ I I I I i
E 4 I I I
:> ~ I I I i
:) I _J.__ _~
-~ ---~- -T I ........
I
I
Sweetwater Union High School District
DIVISION OFBUSINE.SSS~VIC~
May 8, 1987
DEPART ENT
Steve Griffin C~,U~A ~,ol~,
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
278 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
SUBJECT:Appel Development Company - General Plan
Amendment and Rezone
ATTENTION: Steve Griffin
Sweetwater Uni6n High School District has been experiencing
increasingly overcrowded conditions for the past three years.
In speaking with Mr. Bearfield of Appel Development Company,
it is my understanding that an 18,000 square foot retail
center and approximately 75 apartments are planned for this
parcel. Students generated from the project would attend
Chula Vista 3unior High School and Chula Vista High School.
Below are capacity and enrollment statistics for these two
schools:
Permanent School Current Enrollment
March 1987
Capacity
CVJ 1070 1287
CVH 1356 1731
As you can see from this information, the permanent capacity
of the schools is already impacted by 167 students and 375
students, respectively.
Although not considered an acceotable permanent solution,
both Chuta Vista Junior High an~ Chula Vista High School have
responded to overcrowded conditions by establishing temporary
facilities for classrooms on campus. The high school
currently has ten trailer classrooms and six relocatable
classrooms to house the excess students. The junior high has
Steve Griffin
Page Two
May 8, 1987
nine trailer classrooms. Keep in mind that, in addition to a
cost factor of $4620 per trailer and $7169 per relocatable
per year, there are strains on the non-expandable services at
both schools; i.e., libraries, cafeterias, restrooms and
playfields.
Bussing and boundary changes are other methods we have used
to mitigate the overcrowded conditions. Recent legislation
has put a cap on school fees of $1.50 per square foot for
residential development and 25 cents per square foot for
commercial/industrial developments.
Because a development fee is authorized by law to help
mitigate the impact of development on current facilities, it
has been the planning department's policy not to oppose any
projects which conform to the existing community plans. We
do feel, however, that re-zones requesting higher densities
will further exacerbate the current problems.
Even with district plans for a new high school projected for
completion in 1990-1991 school year and a proposed junior
high school to follow, enrollment within the Sweetwater Union
High School District presently exceeds the design capacity at
both Chula Vista Junior High and Chula Vista High School, the
two schools which would service the project area. None the
less, additional students which could potentially be
generated from this project would incrementally worsen
overcrowded conditions and represent a significant cumulative
impact.
Sincerely,
Andrew B. Campbell
Administrator of Planning
ABC:sly
CHULA VISTA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
/:ach cl~ild is an individual of 9rear worth
84 EAST"J*' STREET · CHU/A VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010-6t99 · 619 425-9600
May 8, 1987
Mr. Steve Griffin
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 92010
Dear Mr. Griffin:
RE: APPEL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
General Plan Amendment & Rezone
from Comercial Thoroughfare to High Density
Residential (13-26 OU/ac)...
Please be advised that the Chula Vista City School District is engaged
in an effort to integrate schools and a citizens advisory committee
may make recommendations on school assignments. We can assure that
classroom facilities will be available for students who would come
from this proposed development, however, we cannot assure that these
students will attend Feaster School, as this school is heavily overcrowded,
and this proposed development would impact the current situation.
.~'-'~ Sincerely, ~
John E. Linn
! Assistant Superintendent for
Business Management
/ JEL:dt ~. C ~. ~
eo,~nn OF EOUCATION
OPAL FULLER, PRESIDENT · JUDY SCI.IULENBERG. ViCE PRESIDENT · FRANK A. TARANTINO. CLERK® DR. JOSEPH D. CUMMINGS, MEMBER · Si'IAI{ON GILES. MEMBER
June 18, 1987
To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council of the City of Chula Vista
From: Joseph A. Berlanga, Secretary to the Montgomery Planning Committee
Subject: Montgomery Planning Committee's Review of the Draft Library Master
Plan
Pursuant to City Council referral, the Montgomery Planning Committee, on June
l?, 1987, considered the Draft Library Master Plan, prepared by HBW
Associates, Inc., and Michael Feerer Associates. The Committee, during this
consideration, was assisted by a presentation made by Library Director
Rosemary Lane.
At the conclusion of its consideration of the plan in question, the Committee
made the following findings, and adopted the following recommendation.
"Findings"
1. The early development of a major public library in the Montgomery
Community would foster its revitalization and comprehensive improvement.
2. The specific library needs and potential public library sites within the
Montgomery Community will be identified in the Draft Montgomery Specific
Plan.
Recommendation: That Council:
Determine that the Montgomery Community should be served by a minimum 20,000
square-foot public library building, and that Montgomery's public library
needs be assigned a top priority.
WPC 3998P
cc: Chula Vista City Planning Commission
Rosemary Lane, Library Director